I found the SLO Tribune editorial endorsing Measure G ("You'd do anything for your kids right? Then vote yes on Measure G," Oct. 19) to be insulting and offensive. The Tribune can endorse any position it wants—although I disagreed with the paper's stance and voted "no" on Measure G. What was truly offensive was The Tribune's appalling claim that how someone votes on Measure G is a moral judgment on how much they love their children.
I have a news flash for the SLO Tribune: You can love your children and still be opposed to Measure G. That editorial was cheap pandering that insulted readers' intelligence, and it ought to be beneath a newspaper editorial page. I have three children, and I was opposed to Measure G because it was a poorly drafted initiative that would negatively impact the county. The language would have made it impossible for existing oil and gas production to continue—and that was bad for the children whose parents could have lost those good-paying jobs. It would have been bad for children whose schools could have lost out on the tax revenues generated by oil and gas production in SLO County.
I have friends who were on both sides of the Measure G question. We were able to respectfully disagree without questioning each others' love for our kids. Next time, The Tribune's editorial page should keep the children out of it.